High-stakes Sugar Tax Battle Attracts Big Money, Criticism

Campaign 1996

The Fight Over The Proposed Penny-per-pound Amendment Could Become The Costliest In State History.

October 2, 1996|By John Kennedy, Tallahassee Bureau

TALLAHASSEE — The sugar industry and an Orlando-based environmental group are waging an epic battle over the Everglades that could end up being the most expensive political campaign in Florida history.

So far, about $13.1 million has been spent by the main combatants, focused on a proposed penny-a-pound tax on sugar companies that goes before voters Nov. 5.

FOR THE RECORD - ***************** CORRECTION PUBLISHED OCTOBER 3, 1996 ******************Because of a reporting error, a Wednesday story about the proposed tax on sugar companies overstated the amount the sugar industry will contribute to Everglades cleanup efforts under a 1994 law. The amount is as much as $322 million over the next 20 years.*****************************************************************************

FOR THE RECORD - ***************** CORRECTION PUBLISHED OCTOBER 3, 1996 ******************Because of a reporting error, a Wednesday story about the proposed tax on sugar companies overstated the amount the sugar industry will contribute to Everglades cleanup efforts under a 1994 law. The amount is as much as $322 million over the next 20 years. *****************************************************************************

The proposed constitutional amendment - as well as the high-stakes fight - is drawing its share of prominent critics.

''I'd personally vote for the tax,'' said Attorney General Bob Butterworth, ''but I just don't think it should be done this way.

''It's like both sides are trying to buy a piece of the Florida Constitution.''

The sugar industry already has launched an ambitious television advertising campaign opposing the tax, which would be used to restore parts of Florida's fabled River of Grass polluted by runoff from nearby sugar plantations.

Similarly, the Save Our Everglades group is looking to blanket the airwaves in support of the levy.

''Who knows which side will spend more on this one,'' said John Sowinski, campaign manager of a group organized by sugar growers to oppose the tax. ''It will be hard-fought.''

The issue is attracting a handful of sugar daddies, big money benefactors who are financing the rival sides.

An Orlando Sentinel review of campaign records shows that three big sugar interests, including industry giant U.S. Sugar Corp. of Clewiston, have poured $6.9 million into efforts to scuttle the penny tax over the past three years.

''We don't view this as a fight over the Everglades; we see this as a fight over taxation,'' said Bob Buker, U.S. Sugar vice president. ''For us, this is about survival.''

Sugar growers say they already are helping to restore the Everglades under a 1994 law that requires them to pay as much as $322 million a year over 20 years.

But that represents only about one-third of the project's cost - with Florida taxpayers expected to cover the rest.

On the other side, Save Our Everglades is almost exclusively financed by Paul Tudor Jones, a 42-year-old Wall Street money manager and commodities dealer who has pumped close to $5 million into the campaign since 1993, the Sentinel review shows.

Sugar spokesmen accuse Jones of looking to profit off the tax by using it to manipulate the world price of sugar, an accusation he denies. Financial experts interviewed by the Sentinel also downplay the possibility of such action.

Still, in response to the criticism, Save Our Everglades organizers got the normally reclusive Jones to comment recently about his role in the campaign.

Jones says his financial support stems from a passion for the outdoors and his longtime friendship with Mary Barley and her late husband, George, an Orlando developer who founded Save Our Everglades. George Barley was killed in a plane crash last year.

''I'm not the issue here,'' Jones said. ''But the sugar industry has made me the issue because they don't have a credible defense.''

With such free spending on both sides, the Everglades fight could easily become Florida's most expensive campaign, surpassing the $18.1 million spent by those who fought over the 1994 proposal to legalize casino gambling.

The pace of the sugar campaign is sure to speed up dramatically since Save Our Everglades' proposed amendment was cleared for the ballot by the state Supreme Court last week.

Amendment 4 would impose a 1-cent-per-pound fee on raw sugar grown in the Everglades Agricultural Area for 25 years.

The fee would raise about $36 million a year to restore polluted water and buy farmland in the Everglades area of Palm Beach and Hendry counties.

Two related initiatives on the ballot are largely technical, creating a mechanism and trust fund for collecting the sugar tax.

While the powerful sugar industry is fighting the tax, it has bankrolled the move for another amendment that earlier this year was placed on the November ballot and could prove a stumbling block for Save Our Everglades.

Amendment 1, crafted by the New Smyrna Beach-based Tax Cap Committee, would require that any constitutionally imposed state tax or fee be approved by two-thirds of voters casting ballots in an election.

That measure, if approved in November, could force Save Our Everglades' initiatives to win 67 percent of the vote to take effect.

Save Our Everglades attorneys say the Tax Cap measure won't apply to their initiatives, because they authorize the South Florida Water Management District - not the state - to impose the levy.

But the sugar industry and Tax Cap backers insist the two-thirds requirement would affect the sugar tax.

Although portrayed by supporters as a defense against the possibility of a state income tax, the Tax Cap campaign was largely financed by sugar corporations.

The Sentinel's review of campaign reports shows that of the $4.9 million raised by Tax Cap since 1993, $3.6 million has come from sugar interests.